No, it shines a light on what is important to you. Forget the arguments context and focus on a clerical error that really makes little difference in the discussion. He was right to point out the error, but then move on to the point which is who cares, it's just NW. Tell you what, you focus on the error and pat yourself on the back for that, I'll stick to the point of the thread and whether or not our NW record reflects how much better a coach is than Monson who had scholarships limitations and sanctions to contend with. Carry on.
Hmmm...did you read this part of my first response?
As for a benchmark, no, I do not think that this is the benchmark.
I answered your question about context and agreed that this isn't the number we want. I did not ignore it to focus on a "clerical error."
In response to that you tried to spin the already factually incorrect number into being "technically" correct. Something that you still failed to do. Facts are inconvenient things like that.
I was more amused when you first quoted the already debunked number and frankly, was just trying to tweak you a bit. But you're the one who just took it into a whole new level of spin by trying to make the already debunked fact work for you.
To recap:
- You quote incorrect stat
- I quote you and point it out
- You respond and say it mean's nothing and ask about context.
- I (admittedly) focus the "nothing" comment about facts when you prob meant it about the wider context. I also respond to your question and agree with you that it isn't the record we want.
- You then take what is basically agreement to your question and then try to spin the already debunked fact into being correct. You fail miserably.
- I point out how silly your attempt is
- You ignore my previous response to your question and try to blame me for you getting called out
And to think, all this could be avoided if you knew how to quote the correct stat!
